Dont You Know Youve Always Been Here
| How-do-you-do all, We started world state of war three this night discussing this 1. The virtually off the wall theory seemed to be that Jack Nicholson who was dead heart in the closing credit photo dated 1921 was about 20 years old and that the movie is not that long afterwards - hence its say 1941 and he has already been to the hotel and is now running it over the winter when he goes nuts. I tried to engagement information technology by the vehicle they drove up in - a VW issues - but alas they began production in 1938 and then in theory he could have been late 30s if my friends theory is correct. To that end I point out that they didn't accept snow cats in the belatedly 30s. Anyway, and so is information technology a ghost story, is Jack a real guy etc etc? Regards, YD |
| I would say it's subsequently, merely based upon the snowcat they were riding in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowcat |
| It'due south not a ghost story. It's a possession story. |
| No sir, you're the caretaker. You've always been the caretaker. I ought to know. I've ever been here. I don't think information technology's a ghost story, per se. I don't think information technology'south a possession story, either. It'southward a Stephen Male monarch story. 'Tour the shinin! You want some ice cream, Doc? How could Jack have been a young human being in 1921 if he was a young homo today? How, indeed. Seriously, it doesn't take to make sense. Information technology doesn't thing when it took place. It's been a long time since I read the book or saw the movie. If I had to guess, I'd say in the movie it was the winter of 1972, simply who cares? What does it affair? You lot've always been the caretaker. | |
| Concluding edited past Verboten on Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:08 am |
| I've always viewed it equally purposely nonsensical. It's a Kubrick pic, after all. |
| My GF was dislocated by this too. The hotel honours him by putting him in the picture. That'south all there is to it. |
| Semi On wrote: I've ever viewed information technology equally purposely nonsensical. Information technology'due south a Kubrick moving-picture show, afterward all. What was purposely nonsensical? That he died and so was in the picture earlier he was born? Besides, I'm prepared to be wrong, but I think that part was in the book. I don't call up you get to arraign Kubrick for that. Regardless, I don't get it. Anyone hung up on this ane betoken in the movie may as well just chuck the whole damned thing. Which is fine if that'due south your stance. Scrutinizing this one point seems like an exercise in futility to me. |
| My view: Yes Jack was real, and from the nowadays. When the snow melts in the Spring they will find his corpse in the maze. Merely he has been absorbed by the hotel; incorporated into information technology. The 1921 photo: he wasn't there and so, he is there at present. The adjacent care-taker will meet Jack there and likely he will have causeless the mode and demeanor of the 1921 era. Considering confront it, the present twenty-four hour period Jack was always lost in the hither and now and the 1921 Jack is correct where he is supposed to exist. |
| IIRC in the book Jack doesn't air current up in an onetime picture. I may be wrong there though, it's been a while since I read it. Damned shame that Kubrick didn't hang closer to the book and that the Tv set adaptation that did was kind of lame, because there are parts of that book that are terrifying (the canal thing in the playground? and the moving topiaries? brrrr |
)| Zaphod wrote: My view: Yes Jack was real, and from the nowadays. When the snow melts in the Leap they will find his corpse in the maze. But he has been captivated past the hotel; incorporated into it. The 1921 photo: he wasn't there then, he is there at present. The next care-taker volition meet Jack there and probable he volition have assumed the style and demeanor of the 1921 era. Considering face up it, the present day Jack was e'er lost in the here and at present and the 1921 Jack is right where he is supposed to be. This. Equally Jack became influenced by whatever was in the Overlook, he became part of it. Just like former caretakers and bartenders. I'd say it was fix in the 70s - look at Scatman in the drome. That'due south actually pretty modernistic. |
| I understood it every bit being what is really a pretty mutual theme of these sorts of stories. Jack was consumed by the hotel, became a office of it, and the hotel then waits to merits some other victim. I imagine in that photo he was standing beside the many other winter caretakers that killed/tried to kill their family unit. |
| Wow...after all these years, you lot guys haven't figured it out? I'll break information technology down Barney style for ya'll. The Overlook Hotel was built upon an ancient Indian burial ground. (King has a thing for Indian burial grounds equally information technology was also used in Pet Semetary) The hotel is full of Indian spirits. These Indian spirits verbal revenge on the white human being for the many transgressions against their race. Jack is the embodiment of the white man. The Indian spirits attack the white man past exploiting his many vices...similar drinking, abuse, lack of a work ethic, adultery...and most chiefly racism. Mr. Holloran is the voice of the Indian in the flick...and Delbert Grady is the voice of racism. Remember what Grady said to Jack in the bath? He said that Danny had brought in a 3rd party...a nigger cook. Delbert Grady too was killed by the Indian spirits. When Grady tells Jack that he's the flagman...what he meant was that he's the vessel of the white man's evil ways. When Danny leads Jack into the maze, he uses an one-time Indian trick of backtracking to fool his father. the picture at the finish of the moving-picture show is meant to bear witness us that the evil of the white man spans generations fifty-fifty through decease and as long as the white man is evil, the Indians volition always oppose him. Kubrick got the idea for Jacks pose in the picture from...the Devil. Is it starting to make sense? Jack is the white homo...the WHITE DEVIL. |
| Dang, I requite an A for creativity for that last one, nice piece of work! |
| yd wrote: Dang, I give an A for creativity for that last ane, nice work! ++ |
| Canis wrote: IIRC in the book Jack doesn't wind up in an old picture. I may exist incorrect in that location though, information technology's been a while since I read it. Damned shame that Kubrick didn't hang closer to the book and that the Tv adaptation that did was kind of lame, because there are parts of that volume that are terrifying (the culvert thing in the playground? and the moving topiaries? brrrr Read my above first. At present I tin can tell you that the flick is in fact in the book...simply it's a reverse prototype as is the entire movie. Haven't read the book in most xxx years so... Young Jack is at school...perhaps Sunday School and everyone is looking at pictures and he'southward frustrated with the whole process when one of the other kids sees Jesus in a motion picture just as Jack is blasphemous. Jack then feels mad at himself for cursing only equally that kid sees Jesus and feels that he's somehow betrayed Jesus. Kubrick reverses this in the movie as he reversed many things. the moving picture at the end is Jack's acceptance of his own abuse by the Devil. If y'all lookout man the movie closely, well-nigh of the big reveals happen in mirrors. The cool part is that virtually of information technology isn't real...every bit in non ghostly. Mr. Halloran tells Danny that the images are like pictures in a book...they aren't real. the bathroom scene (in room 237) is a great example of this. When Jack goes into the bath, he sees that immature cute woman and so gets lustful (infidelity). When he looks into the mirror, he sees her rotting corpse. She isn't really there...he's seeing the ugliness that his abuse has created in his own mind. Once more, it's an instance of him being the white devil. |
| That's a great breakdown of the picture show, I know my quondam motion picture history teacher would love the explanation. How close is the motion picture to the book, did Kubrick make any personal changes in the picture show? |
| R-T¥PE wrote: That's a neat breakdown of the movie, I know my old film history teacher would love the explanation. How shut is the flick to the book, did Kubrick make whatsoever personal changes in the motion picture? Many subtle changes. King viewed them equally a personal attack. That's why King didn't show whatever love for Kubrick when it came out. Kubrick, every bit in many of his other movies, wasn't going to miss a hazard to make his ain statement on the homo condition...peculiarly equally it relates to American politics/policy. Now I will readily admit that Kubrick has stated publicly that the picture of Jack at the end is to suggest reincarnation...merely that's as far as he ever went with it. If you read between the lines, again, I think he's really suggesting that unless nosotros deed, bad ideas can be rejuvenated...history tin can echo itself. |
| Hoos wrote: Zaphod wrote: My view: Yep Jack was real, and from the present. When the snowfall melts in the Spring they will find his corpse in the maze. Only he has been captivated by the hotel; incorporated into information technology. The 1921 photograph: he wasn't there then, he is in that location at present. The next care-taker volition meet Jack there and likely he will have assumed the fashion and demeanor of the 1921 era. Because face it, the nowadays day Jack was always lost in the here and now and the 1921 Jack is right where he is supposed to exist. This. As Jack became influenced by whatever was in the Overlook, he became part of it. Just like former caretakers and bartenders. I'd say it was set in the 70s - look at Scatman in the airport. That'south really pretty mod. Yes this was how I saw it too. The hotel "took him in." |
| Ah, skillful. A Shining thread, with deep analysis going on. Analyze please: The scene towards the end, where Wendy is running around half-crazed with the knife in her hand, she looks in a room, and in that location's a guy in a tuxedo seated on the edge of the bed, with someone in what looks like a bear costume kneeling between his legs, they both await at Wendy like, wtf is your problem? Information technology'southward i of the most bizarre images I've always seen in a film. (hey it's Kubrick) Now this could also open things upwards for all manner of "furry" jokes. Don't hold back! |
| In that location is also the theme of recurrence. The picture is from the 1920'due south (it'south a NYE political party), you tin see the flappers conspicuously. Jack *was* there back then. And he was at that place again (the story of the previous flagman who went all crazy). The Jack (our Jack) comes back, yet again, to continue living out the hell. Our Jack was *plain* in more than modern times, ref: Aerodrome, HAM radio, snowcat, and the picture above Scatman's bed, consisting of a 1970's fashion afro-empowered-naked-black-lady. Finally, we tin can surmise that Danny had "the shining" and thus Jack probably had his own, to 1 degree or some other. Scatman tells united states of america that the hotel itself had some 'shine' to it, and therefore information technology's reasonable to assume that is how information technology overtakes and corrupts our Jack. |
| spoof wrote: Ah, skilful. A Shining thread, with deep analysis going on. Analyze please: The scene towards the end, where Wendy is running around half-crazed with the knife in her paw, she looks in a room, and there's a guy in a tuxedo seated on the edge of the bed, with someone in what looks similar a behave costume kneeling between his legs, they both look at Wendy like, wtf is your problem? It'due south ane of the most baroque images I've e'er seen in a film. (hey it's Kubrick) Now this could also open things upward for all manner of "furry" jokes. Don't hold back! If Kubrick is going with the native American theme as posted by E.P. I wonder if that's representing how man is destroying nature or "screwing with the animals" as part of human being's failures? It could also stand for one of the many closet horrors that are usually hidden from others, just she finds once she sees Jack's other side. Merely thinking. |
| E.P. wrote: Wow...later on all these years, you guys haven't figured information technology out? I'll break it downward Barney style for ya'll. The Overlook Hotel was built upon an ancient Indian burial ground. (King has a thing for Indian burial grounds as it was besides used in Pet Semetary) The hotel is full of Indian spirits. These Indian spirits exact revenge on the white man for the many transgressions against their race. Jack is the embodiment of the white man. The Indian spirits attack the white man by exploiting his many vices...like drinking, abuse, lack of a work ethic, infidelity...and most importantly racism. Mr. Holloran is the phonation of the Indian in the picture show...and Delbert Grady is the voice of racism. Think what Grady said to Jack in the bath? He said that Danny had brought in a tertiary party...a nigger cook. Delbert Grady besides was killed by the Indian spirits. When Grady tells Jack that he'southward the caretaker...what he meant was that he's the vessel of the white man'south evil means. When Danny leads Jack into the maze, he uses an old Indian trick of backtracking to fool his father. the picture at the cease of the movie is meant to evidence us that the evil of the white man spans generations even through death and as long as the white man is evil, the Indians volition always oppose him. Kubrick got the thought for Jacks pose in the picture from...the Devil. Is it starting to make sense? Jack is the white man...the WHITE DEVIL. Bravo. This merely reinforces that Kubrick was one of the foremost picture show makers of the 20th century while Steven King, was is, and e'er volition be a hack. "The Shining" is also just a distraction to what is really going on in the picture and is nothing more an advanced form of ESP, of course, 'the shining' sounds a bit more than voodoo, hence the presence of the blackman who saves the solar day...and who inevitably gets an ax in the back for his troubles. But you gotta admit, he had a well busy flat! |
| I don't think that Kubrick would e'er desire one of his movies so definitively explained. |
| Bolero wrote: I don't retrieve that Kubrick would e'er desire one of his movies so definitively explained. Well, then, peradventure he shouldn't accept gone and died. |
| FXWizard wrote: Bolero wrote: I don't retrieve that Kubrick would ever want i of his movies and so definitively explained. Well, then, maybe he shouldn't have gone and died. Hey, it's Kubrick. For all nosotros know he isn't really dead. He's just loungin' in an alternating universe waiting to influence another generation with his mystique... MR2Di4 |
| i e'er simply saw a story virtually psychosis, as observed from within psychosis. |
| Quote: You've ever been the caretaker. That is the giveaway, to the photo at the terminate. I always thought it was a brilliant ending. It's not satisfying in the way that many would prefer, but I got information technology at first viewing in a theater. It's fairly chilling, actually, it seems a line of evil is unbroken, a fairly profound and basic argument. |
| E.P. wrote: The Overlook Hotel was congenital upon an aboriginal Indian burial ground. (Male monarch has a thing for Indian burying grounds as it was also used in Pet Semetary) The hotel is total of Indian spirits. It isn't a "Stephen King" thing per se, they were common interests in the 60s and 70s; Indians and/or Indian burial grounds. The burying grounds were a mutual vehicle for horror stories, specially stories of vengeance. |
| The truth is that The Shining is the story of how Stanley Kubrick cut a deal with the U.S. Government to fake the Apollo moon landings. There's actually some interesting stuff in that otherwise stark raving mad analysis. Doesn't the hotel fire to the ground in the volume? I liked the topiary in the book. Would have been stop motion back then or shitty CGI today though. |
| Quote: The scene towards the terminate, where Wendy is running around half-crazed with the knife in her hand, she looks in a room, and there's a guy in a tuxedo seated on the border of the bed, with someone in what looks like a conduct costume kneeling between his legs, they both look at Wendy like, wtf is your trouble? This scene serves a few purposes. It allows Kubrick to cameo in his ain flick, it also demonstrates that at the tiptop of Jack's (and the Hotel's) frenzy, people who don't shine tin see its imagery. You lot could also say that information technology adds to Wendy's panic and confusion. Or maybe it was the hotel, like a serial killer leaving a calling card, letting Wendy know that in that location was much more going on than her husband and son going mental simultaneously. |
| Nutrimentia wrote: The truth is that The Shining is the story of how Stanley Kubrick cut a bargain with the U.S. Regime to fake the Apollo moon landings. There's actually some interesting stuff in that otherwise stark raving mad analysis. Doesn't the hotel burn to the ground in the book? I liked the topiary in the book. Would take been stop motion back so or shitty CGI today though. Wow. Completely wackadoodle. I beloved information technology! At that place's i thing though: Quote: One other important indicate is that the Manager of The Overlook tells Jack that the previous caretaker went crazy from the stress of the job and killed his wife and 2 girls. Stress of the job? Hell I'm already stressed and crazy, and I would have that chore tomorrow. It would accept the contrary effect. |
| MichaelC wrote: Due east.P. wrote: The Overlook Hotel was built upon an ancient Indian burial ground. (King has a matter for Indian burial grounds as it was besides used in Pet Semetary) The hotel is full of Indian spirits. It isn't a "Stephen King" thing per se, they were common interests in the 60s and 70s; Indians and/or Indian burial grounds. The burial grounds were a common vehicle for horror stories, particularly stories of vengeance. I think you misunderstood me. Male monarch has used Indian burial grounds in his Own novels. He favors them. So that's why I said he has a matter for them...because he has used them in his own novels. I wasn't suggesting that the idea was wholly exclusive to King...it isn't. Hope that clears up any defoliation you may have. |
| Quote: Doesn't the hotel burn to the ground in the book? Blows up is more like it. One of the few jobs that the caretaker has in the books is to release the pressure on the boilers. Needless to say when he goes completely nuts and evil he forgets to do this. |
| He almost gets it though. |
| Nope. I fell comatose during this movie and woke up at the very end. Maybe information technology was a fantastic example of Kubrick's piece of work...merely all I know is that it bored me light-headed and didn't scare me at all. Which is non what I'm expecting when I go run into scary movies. The book, however...now THAT scared the crap out of me. Which, in my stance, is pretty impressive. |
allensoutimseling99.blogspot.com
Source: https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?t=1104022
0 Response to "Dont You Know Youve Always Been Here"
Post a Comment